"The UEFA Cup has been an excellent tournament over the years, but in some senses it has suffered a little bit [through] being a different tournament and not having the same prestige as the Champions League. We believe that a new name and a new brand identity will help with sponsors and with the whole identity of the competition."
Quoted from UEFA General Secretary David Taylor, who was commenting on the UEFA Cup’s makeover for the 2009-10 season. It will witness a name change to the Europa League along with a structure overhaul that will resemble that of its parent competition the Champions League. Call me sceptical by all means, but an altered name title and structure will fail to implement a successful ‘reformation’ for a competition that will still remain sunken in the depths of the Champions League’s reputation.
As a Manchester City fan, I am ecstatic that the UEFA Cup allows additional clubs the opportunity of continental success. The wide playing field of competition means that it is something that the tournament can boast. While the Champions League is indefinitely the pinnacle of European club football and undoubtedly where all aspiring clubs aim to be, there is an air of predictability about it. The UEFA Cup, for all its reputation and image as being lesser and inferior, does throw up surprises and allows the chance for unknown clubs – minnows if you wish – to make dreams a reality. The point being that, despite the UEFA Cup still being a valuable competition for its participants, the changes made won’t improve its reputation.
I am in coherence with UEFA’s decision to implement changes, but the wrong changes have been made. After the admitance that the UEFA Cup lives in the prestigious shadow of the Champions League, would it not be worthwhile to distinguish the competition as its own? The current format hands Champions League dropouts the opportunity to still win the UEFA Cup, as at various stages the teams which fail to make it are given a new berth of success. For example, those who are defeated in the Champions League Third Qualifying Round still advance to the UEFA Cup First Round despite their failings, while the clubs who finish 3rd in each group progress to the UEFA Cup round of 32. The structure of the UEFA Cup means that it is directly beneath the Champions League, as failure in the latter could lead to success in the former. Removing any involvement of Champions League sides would inevitably reduce the quality of the clubs who progress to the final stages, but a status as a more independent competition would create an ‘All or nothing’ mentality. I am also a strong believer that the victor of a competition should compete in it from the beginning, instead of only joining the competition half-way through, after the group stages. This proposal would realistically never go ahead. However, the change in structure would distinguish it as a separate tournament, rather than as a ‘safety net’ competition viable for failed Champions League teams.
A second proposal is a return to its original roots by inducing a complete knock-out format. The current system, whereby three out of five teams in each group qualify, fails to create any spark or true desire. Often one solitary victory and a draw can ensure progression so there is a lacking edge. A knockout format bred on the idea that one team must triumph over two legs would guarantee a passionate fight until the end. Portsmouth will know that their group fixture against AC Milan is not absolutely vital, at worst an opportunity to welcome a European powerhouse and gain some collectible signatures – they should still advance even if they are defeated in that single match. Imagine the atmosphere down at Fratton Park if Kaka and co had to desperately overturn a one-goal deficit with the thought of elimination becoming more of a daunting reality by the minute. But, as ever, it is a grim case of UEFA trying to gain as much revenue as possible. A group stage generates more money as more clubs are involved for longer – at the group stage there is a guarantee of at least a further four matches so extra television rights are available. The prospect of a European giant being eliminated at such an early stage and thereby the unpredictability factor of a knockout format, it appears, is ultimately safeguarded by the current UEFA Cup Group Stage, even under these new changes.
"These changes will improve this historic competition, which is very important for Uefa and for European football as it gives more fans, players and clubs the thrill of European club football." To their credit, the new group format restores a degree of organisation as teams will play each other home and away as opposed to only one fixture – a much fairer and balanced system. Another reform will see TV rights sold centrally through UEFA themselves. Currently clubs negotiate their own rights up to the semi-final stage, which in turn will strengthen them and UEFA financially through increased income. At least it will partially bridge the gulf in commercial rewards to the Champions League.
In reality the UEFA Cup lost all credibility when the Champions League was extended to four clubs per nation. The emphasis of ‘Champions’ has been somewhat ridiculed and lost in recent times, and in turn the UEFA Cup has been relegated as a secondary club competition and to the status of the ‘unpopular, passe kid of the classroom’. Still, at least all association with the defective, mediocre Intertoto Cup has ceased following on from its abolishment.
It would be idiotic to believe the UEFA Cup could match the Champions League - such would be pure fantasy as the latter contains champions, but a straight name change and a few structural tweeks will fail to captivate the neutrals. The newly-christened Europa League will, on a given day, produce as many inspiring tales as any other competition, but Platini’s hopes of “a new brand identity” will shatter before they have even began.
No comments:
Post a Comment